The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 James Kirkpatrick Archive
Trump’s Path to Victory: Affirmative Action Abolition; Immigration Restriction; Economic Populism
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Earlier: Trump’s Speech Hated By People Who Hate America and A Culture War Battle Trump Can Win

President Trump made a start towards recasting the presidential race on July 4, but he needs to match his words with actions. The unhinged Main Stream Media response to what would have been considered patriotic banalities from any other president shows he has an opening to rally America against JournoFa and in defense of our heroes, history, and identity. But American identity is fragmenting because people are given specific incentives to disassociate from it. My view: Trump needs to run on a civic nationalist platform with three essential components: ending Affirmative Action racial privileges; immigration restriction; economic populism. A symbolic Culture War just won’t be enough.

Trump didn’t say anything revolutionary or especially right-wing in his July 4 address. It shows how beaten down American patriots are that so many reacted to it like a man in the desert would react to an oasis [Trump’s Independence Day Speech Was Not ‘Dark’ Or ‘Divisive,’ It Was American, by Margot Cleveland, The Federalist, July 6, 2020]. But contrast the way leading newspapers covered it:

What was so “dark” and “warlike” about Trump’s speech? Nothing. Brit Hume at Fox News has proclaimed it “utterly mystifying” that America’s leading newspapers and journalists found the speech so troubling. “I have rarely seen such biased and misleading coverage and such extravagant opinion reaction to this than I saw this weekend,” he said [Brit Hume: Why biased coverage of Trump’s Mount Rushmore speech ‘ could be a turning point,by Talia Kaplan, Fox News, July 7, 2020].

Of course, this isn’t “mystifying” at all to us. There is a vast Diversity Industry that incentivizes people to not associate themselves with American history and identity. Consider Colin Kaepernick. He denounced July 4 as a “white supremacist” celebration. This was completely different from what he was tweeting just a few years ago [Colin Kaepernick mocked for tweet calling 4th of July ‘celebration of white supremacy, Fox6, July 6 2020].

Has Kaepernick paid a price for this? No, he has not. Instead, he’s getting a fawning documentary from Disney, once the most mainstream “Americana” company that could possibly exist [Colin Kaepernick, Disney announce partnership deal, ESPN, July 6, 2020].

Conservatives can say that Americans need to stand up to Political Correctness or boycott companies that engage in such activities. However, the truth is that an individual boycott is going to make little difference. And, more importantly, any overt opposition to Black Lives Matter could endanger your job and even your physical safety.

Unlike murderers in Chicago and New York, or rioters who occupy police stations, white dissidents will feel the wrath of law enforcement if they as much as dare post an unapproved flyer in public.

Ronald Reagan famously described the government’s view of the economy. “If it moves, tax it,” he said. “If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” In other words, conservatives understand that the state can create perverse incentives for destructive economic behavior through its policies.

But they should also realize the same is true about cultural policies. What is at the root of the destructive anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-white movement rotting our country? State-sponsored discrimination against whites, i.e. Affirmative Action.

Government has created a powerful incentive for people to claim oppression. The reason we get Rachel Dolezal, Elizabeth Warren, and (possibly) Shaun King claiming at various points to be non-white is because they derive economic and social benefits from doing so. As Scott Greer pointed out in No Campus for White Men, Affirmative Action creates a vast market on college campuses for various ethnic studies programs which produce a huge supply of professional victims armed with an ideology of grievance. This has burst from the universities into the media and entertainment industry and now into the culture at large.

Affirmative Action is already a major issue this November. A constitutional amendment that will restore racial discrimination in hiring will be on the ballot in California [Affirmative Action Amendment Narrowly Passed by Senate, by Evan Symon, California Globe, June 25, 2020].

President Trump has never opposed Affirmative Action explicitly. Yet he is clearly aware it exists. For example, back in 1989, he noted entirely correctly that a “well-educated black has a tremendous advantage over a well-educated white in terms of job market.”

If conservatives are serious about defending a common American civic identity, they must be serious about removing racial privilege in American law. Otherwise, they can’t act surprised that people are reacting rationally in response to clear incentives.

What Steve Sailer has called the “Flight From White” is simply self-interest in action. If Republicans really oppose this, they need to act–especially since it will be an election issue no matter what they do. It may even allow them to make inroads into the Asian vote.

I’m only half joking when I say that if the GOP can’t summon the will to do anything about this, I’d encourage all readers to take some Duolingo lessons, identify as Hispanic (which can be any race, according to the census), and bring the whole thing down via malicious compliance. Let’s hope President Trump and the Republicans give us a more honorable option.

The second step, of course: immigration restriction. While it’s easy to bash President Trump, he has taken a number of actions here recently.

Many (including me) are very critical of President Trump for not doing enough. Still, this isn’t nothing. And no other Republican would have done these things. These are changes that will help (and are helping) American workers now.

ORDER IT NOW

However, incredibly, inexplicably, President Trump is still leaving his greatest weapon on the table—a remittance tax that would pay for the border wall. Given that the president has just pulled the U.S. out of the World Health Organization during the pandemic, some America First action when it comes to immigration seems like far less to ask.

Finally, speaking of the pandemic, there’s the issue of Universal Basic Income, or a “Citizens Dividend.” The U.S. has already implemented this policy to some extent with the $1,200 checks that most Americans received a few months ago, and it seems possible that another stimulus is on the way.

However, Trump is setting himself up for political failure if the next stimulus is funneled through politically-connected businesses and Wall Street firms instead of going straight to Americans.

Trump’s instincts are sound. He was right to make sure that his signature was on the first check that Americans received. Now he needs to do it again, but not just for Americans who make less than $40,000 [Second stimulus check: Trump says to expect more checks ‘soon,’ 10WAVY, July 7, 2020]. Middle-class Americans, including those who make more than $40,000, are being crushed by the pandemic economy and need a bailout, especially when they are already excluded from many welfare programs for supposedly making too much money.

If President Trump can’t stand up middle class voters, the very “Middle American Radicals” his 2016 campaign represented, why should they turn out for him again?

A nation isn’t simply a static collection of people. It is also something that can be made or unmade by leaders. Our nation was created by the Founders and it is no accident that those who wish to deconstruct it are toppling their monuments.

If President Trump doesn’t want to go down in history as America’s Romulus Augustus, he needs to change the incentives so people have an interest in identifying with and fighting for the Historic American Nation.

Abolish internal racial divisions by law; strengthen immigration restriction; bail out the middle class–historically the backbone of any nationalist movement.

If Trump can’t do those things, America will fragment. And then it’s every man, and every tribe, for themselves.

James Kirkpatrick [Email him |Tweet him @VDAREJamesK] is a Beltway veteran and a refugee from Conservatism Inc. His latest book is Conservatism Inc.: The Battle for the American Right. Read VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow‘s Preface here.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 6 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Would that it would be so.

  2. anon[641] • Disclaimer says:

    Brilliant, a UBI with minor nativist frills. That’s all you need. Just don’t get too wrapped up in making sure no beaners get any, or the bureaucracy will exploit the verification process for more mass surveillance and control. The dividend would cost about half a trillion a year, a drop in the bucket compared to the macro-scale looting of 2009, let alone the sequel of 2020. So if you want to pay for it you can just imprison some Goldman Sachs kleptocrats pour encourager les autres. The kleptocratic grabass will stop.

    One more thing. Have Trump command an end to the Afghan and Iraq gravy train, deadline the day before election day, with “That’s an order. Let’s see if CIA obeys it.” Trigger a constitutional crisis. His supporters’ enemy is CIA, not puny wogs. Trump will prevail because CIA’s war on the American people is out in the open. That will ultimately free up an extra trillion a year, not counting what CIA steals from DoD. Trump almost pulled it off with Korea but CIA did their spoiler thing. This time just gavel open a loya jirga and go home.

  3. KenH says:

    Trump didn’t say anything revolutionary or especially right-wing in his July 4 address. It shows how beaten down American patriots are that so many reacted to it like a man in the desert would react to an oasis

    So many conservatives and republicans have moved to the left over the George Floyd incident on things like the confederate flag, confederate monuments and the Columbus Day holiday that anyone who gives us right of center rhetoric seems like a messiah and revolutionary. That’s why everyone is flocking to the Tucker Carlson show because he’s the only one telling the truth and pushing back against this massive offensive against our culture and history staged by the far left.

    Trump will never demand an end to affirmative action although he should. That would alienate the blacks and he still is desperate for their vote. He’s kind of a weak man with few principles.

    Republicans need to give up on blacks and become very confrontational towards them as they are towards whites. The Republican agenda should include damaging black and non-white racial interests just like the Democrat mission is to damage white interests. This means at minimum abolishing affirmative action and ending section 8 housing. Black on white violent crime should be treated as a national epidemic and any black on white crime should automatically be considered a felony hate crime with a minimum sentence of 25yrs. The murder of a white person should automatically result in the death penalty.

  4. Ronald Reagan famously described the government’s view of the economy. “If it moves, tax it,” he said. “If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” In other words, conservatives understand that the state can create perverse incentives for destructive economic behavior through its policies.

    But they should also realize the same is true about cultural policies. What is at the root of the destructive anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-white movement rotting our country? State-sponsored discrimination against whites, i.e. Affirmative Action.

    Reagan made some attempts to curtail affirmative action, but they failed for the precise same reasons that Trump’s anti-immigration efforts have been constantly stymied. They failed due to the institutional force of the Civil Rights Act, resistance from what we would now call the deep state including members of his own administration, and opposition from corporate America.

    Frank Dobbin’s book “Inventing Equal Opportunity” describes the role of personnel and HR departments at America’s leading corporations in promoting affirmative action. In the below excerpt he discusses the abortive effort to roll-back affirmative action during the Reagan administration. Ask yourself if the events described below seem familiar at all and if perhaps what we’re seeing with the Trump White House is history repeating itself:

    Reagan’s three attempts to cut affirmative action were not altogether successful, in part because of opposition from his administration and Congress, but those attempts signaled that affirmative action was under attack. First, in 1981 labor secretary Raymond Donovan proposed that only the biggest federal contractors should have to write affirmative action plans. The threshold would rise from 50 employees and $50,000 in federal contracts to 250 employees and $1 million, reducing the number of companies covered from 16,767 to 4,143. Reviews of contractors in advance of large awards would be cut. These changes would have dismantled Nixon’s affirmative action system , but complaints from the EEOC and Congress led Reagan to scuttle the plan in 1983.

    Second, after the midterm elections of 1983, White House staffers proposed to close the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), which monitored affirmative action compliance, and institute a National Self-Monitoring Reporting System. AT&T, Hewlett Packard, General Motors, and IBM signed self-monitoring agreements before opposition within the administration undermined the plan.

    Third, in 1985 the Department of Justice ordered public agencies in 56 cities to halt the use of goals and timetables in their affirmative action programs, and Attorney General Edwin Meese proposed to end Nixon-era goals and timetables for private firms. Secretary of State George Schultz, who as Nixon’s secretary of labor had helped to craft the goals -and-timetables system, killed the plan with the help of William Brock at Labor, Howard Baker at the Treasury, and Elizabeth Dole at Transportation…

    Some of the opposition that Reagan faced came from a group he thought would be behind him, corporate executives. Executive support for affirmative action measures played a role in Reagan’s difficulty carrying out the demolition of affirmative action, but also in the human resources profession’s successful reframe of diversity as a business issue.

    Man leading executives had become cheerleaders for affirmative action by President Jimmy Carter’s last days in office. Some thought that the programs could inoculate against a reoccurence of the race riots of the 1960’s, while others made arguments about equality being the American way. In 1979, a Wall Street Journal poll of top executives found that nearly two-thirds favored government programs to increase hiring of women and minorities. Many executives now fought Reagan, filing amicus briefs supporting affirmative action, sending telegrams to the White House to protest plans to cut affirmative action orders, and testifying before Congress on the benefits of affirmative action.

    • Thanks: Ann Nonny Mouse
  5. Regarding affirmative action, one can compare with Europe, as for example France, where such a thing directly is almost prohibited constitutionally, viewed as an infringement upon equality before the law etc

    However in practice there are workarounds. One can have a programme seeking to ‘benefit the long-term unemployed’, with people realising this will mostly apply to those of a migrant background.

    But the biggest hurdle to what Kirkpatrick proposes, is that laws and programmes really don’t matter much anymore, because the West has degenerated into ‘kritarchy’, the very Jewish-inspired control by judges, as Unz’s Israel Shamir has noted

    With the US leading but also in Britain and Europe as well, judges are just bending everything and finding all sorts of ‘human rights’ reasons to ‘order’ that national policies be run as the globalist oligarchs prefer

    The political systems are breaking down, in the sense that what the gangs of judges are doing is considered as beyond review or remedy … whereas, for example, in the US Constitution, Congress is given unlimited power to remove any and all of the USA’s 865 federal and Supreme Court justices, merely for ‘lack of good behaviour’, which is in Congress’ sole capacity to judge, with judicial impeachment by House and trial by Senate

    However, they almost never use that power, and certainly not to rein in the judges setting policies in what is not the judges’ domain at all. Some of the early USA founding fathers predicted the 1789 Constitution was too weak on limiting the judicial branch, and that the eventual degeneracy of the USA would be a judicial tyranny, as it has become.

    Unless a revolution is willing and able to take the steps to undo judicial seizure of power on behalf of the oligarchy, it will fall flat.

  6. The problem with this call to action? Only very stupid people will be tricked again by Trump campaign promises, especially these 11th hour ones he’d only consider because there’s a good chance he’ll lose as things are now, and in all probability will continue.

    People like me? We’re more worried about what Trump will do when he no longer needs us for reelection. He doesn’t like whites, in every specific that comes us he reminds us he doesn’t like guns and gun owners, is still the liberal NYC Democrat he was not long ago, like Reagan was a self-described “FDR Democrat”, the list goes on and on.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All James Kirkpatrick Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings